Yeah Trump supporters are having a great time, gearing up for the wave of violence and aggression they wish to unleash on all who oppose them.

Ya just like San Jose just like Albuquerque just like Chicago. Someone is definitely gearing up for a wave of violence. I think 3 Trump people hit 3
protesters what 6 months ago? How many dozens of rioters have assaulted Trump supporters since then? I wish I could shake you out of your bubble.
I'll tell you what, I'll try and keep an open mind and keep researching, and I beg you to do the same. Think outside your box. I was as scared of
Trump as anyone before I did any research and saw where the fear mongering was really coming from.

You misunderstood I believe. Those violently protesting in gangs today ARE the left. That is the problem at hand. Yes...violence has been executed
on the right and the left...but today's topic is referencing violence on the left at these protests.

Other than that...peace.

I haven't misunderstood a thing. Violence is becoming an increasing part of our political landscape.

Donald J. Trump has advocated for that. No other candidate has done so.

I am appalled by any and all violence, and will say, again, there is never any justification for it in the public square.

1. Trump is not the only person in America who wants to look at reformulating immigration standards, and it bears noting that the Obama
Administration has deported more "illegals" than any Executive in recent history.

2. Trump's approval (which includes approval of his rather unique take on the issues before us) has been steady around 33-35% for months. That is
not a majority of anything, least of all the American people. That is the point I made that you are responding to.

You know, If you get the threatened feeling, or if you are being followed to closely on your way out, I advise you to defend yourself with any means
possible, I hope it remains calm as well but don't let yourself wind up on some video. This # is out of control and it has to stop. Be safe and tell
us how it goes

no it isn't out of control, because the police and security are either absent or ARE NOT controlling it....Baltimore was out of control, Ferguson was
out of control....this is just you wishing for a "rage stimulant"

I have wanted to start a thread that is a collection of "Anti Trump" people being violent toward rally goers and innocent attendees at these events.
There are so many videos now of them assaulting, destroying property, attacking cops, women, yelling at elderly and children....etc..etc.

WHOEVER they are, whatever they come in the name of, they represent the LEFT, be they a Bernie or Hillary supporter. Most have seem to come in the
name of Bernie, or Mexican "Liberation" movements, Socialists, or flat out Anarchist Black Bloc agitators.

But this IS...the LEFT.

They are so many videos out now of their aggression that I could make an entire thread with dozens of videos. Versus a FEW which showcase any Trump
supporter using violence or being the initial aggressor. It's overwhelming now.

And the most DISGUSTING part of it is, is they are holding signs that talk about 'stopping hate', while the Media STILL claims that the Trump
supporters are the violent ones, while as EVIDENCED, that is not the reality.

It's okay, more will come, and it will grow Trump's base, it will garner more support. I believe now is the time to physically 'take one for the
team'....and when November comes....when Trump is in office....................

NO MERCY. NOT ONE INCH.

Boy, this is a nauseating little screed, innit?

It is a convenient fiction for violent authoritarians to create a chain of responsibility from anyone who has voted left of center to the most violent
people acting out at Trump rallies. It's also a vile deception. I disapprove entirely of these people, but they do not number among anyone I know
who supports anyone on the left. Who are they? I'm guessing agitators of opportunity. Angry, hormonally juiced individuals lacking the maturity to
participate properly in the political process. Children who are not terribly bright but whose anger has been successfully stirred by Trump and his
supporters.

But you sure seem excited to blur it all together into one large group that can be easily distinguished by having politics somewhere left of center,
and announcing that once your man is in office there will be "NO MERCY" for any of us.

It is a convenient fiction for violent authoritarians to create a chain of responsibility from anyone who has voted left of center to the most violent
people acting out at Trump rallies. It's also a vile deception. I disapprove entirely of these people, but they do not number among anyone I know
who supports anyone on the left.

Very eloquently stated.

The very ones here claiming to support free speech are the one's trying to shut it down.

Political violence is abominable, and, only one candidate has routinely advocated for violence from the podium:

It's sadly ironic that the "law and order" authoritarians are so transparent in their prejudices.

Is it too much to hope that this trend toward violence that OP is pointing to (although I have noted that I utterly disagree with their suggestion
that such is limited to only one side of teh political coin) can be reversed?

That's a question more in line with the intent of the OP, I would think.

It is a convenient fiction for violent authoritarians to create a chain of responsibility from anyone who has voted left of center to the most violent
people acting out at Trump rallies. It's also a vile deception. I disapprove entirely of these people, but they do not number among anyone I know
who supports anyone on the left.

Very eloquently stated.

The very ones here claiming to support free speech are the one's trying to shut it down.

Political violence is abominable, and, only one candidate has routinely advocated for violence from the podium:

Donald J. Trump

That's right. I am disappointed in Sanders regarding Nevada, suggesting that people who very clearly were his supporters and who quite clearly
crossed the line were not his purview to comment on. I believe he implied, essentially, that their anger was justified and that it was the place of
DNC officials to respond to their anger (and not his place to condemn their behavior). Because they were unambiguously aligned with him, I think he
should have shown leadership and made it clear that death threats and vandalism are not acceptable. But that's the worst I've seen in terms of
political leaders on the left endorsing violence. It's not good, but it's not the same thing as saying your political opponents should be brought
out on stretchers for the crime of making noise where they're unwanted.

“If you see any somebody throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Just knock the hell out of them…. I’ll pay for the legal
fees, I promise.”

"I love the old days—you know what they used to do to guys like that when they were in a place like this? They’d be carried out on a stretcher,
folks.”

"Part of the problem, and part of the reason it takes so long is nobody wants to hurt each other anymore, right?… Our country has to toughen up,
folks. We have to toughen up. These people are bringing us down, remember that they’re bringing us down… These are not good people. These are not
the people that are going to make our country great… these are the people that are destroying our country.”

And this is why we should round up all the people who habitually speed on the way to work and summarily execute them. We certainly can't be having law
breakers in this great society of ours.

Well that was lame.

Have anything other than hyperbole?

I'm sure you're accustomed to people responding to you who are entirely unconcerned with your opinion. That said, the point is that you construct a
black and white argument that says illegal immigrants are fundamentally lawless because they are residing in the US illegally. An impoverished mother
who steals to feed her children is not automatically without respect for the rule of law, nor is the illegal immigrant. Adults decide all the time
that their judgement in a specific circumstance trumps the rule of law. Sometimes they do this for quite noble reasons, sometimes for selfish ones.
But to posture as though this doesn't all lie on a spectrum is obtuse. You seem smart enough. I'm sure you understood my point. You'd just rather
not acknowledge it because you have an agenda here, I reckon.

That said, the point is that you construct a black and white argument that says illegal immigrants are fundamentally lawless because they are
residing in the US illegally.

The LAW says it, and has for over 200 years.

Knock on the door ask for permission to come in, and get in line like everyone else except one demographic out of ALL the people that have come,and
and still want to come here, but can't.

Because of ONE group who thinks they are so effing special.

An impoverished mother who steals to feed her children is not automatically without respect for the rule of law, nor is the illegal immigrant. Adults
decide all the time that their judgement in a specific circumstance trumps the rule of law.

Awesome!

I love emotional 'arguments'. I really shed a tear,

So people should just ignore immigration law. Which means the rest of us get to ignore every LAW we don't like.

Hey let anarchy run supreme since people get to pick and choose what laws to obey.

Someone needs to tell congress to go home since they are no longer needed.

Since it's their jobs go write bills that become LAWS.

Someone needs to tell the cops to go home too since they are no longer needed. Since they don't have to be enforced.

I can understand your disappointment with Bernie ... he doesn't seem to be the same person that started the race last fall.

Exactly. It saddens me.

Notably, of course, both Sanders and Clinton immediately condemned the violence in San Jose.

Trump is the only one who has called for violence from his podium.

And, sadly, he's getting it.

Right, and this is key: the narrative here and presumably in the conservative echo chamber (I watch Fox semi-regularly as a sort of self-assigned
homework) insists that an action by one of these violent protestors cannot be separated from Hillary, Bernie, or their supporters. How does this
work? They are at least condemning the violence. Meanwhile, Donald Trump is offering to fund the legal defense of his supporters who seem quite
clearly guilty of Assault. To be honest I am more than a little concerned with where we are headed with these themes.

That said, the point is that you construct a black and white argument that says illegal immigrants are fundamentally lawless because they are
residing in the US illegally.

The LAW says it, and has for over 200 years.

Knock on the door ask for permission to come in, and get in line like everyone else except one demographic out of ALL the people that have come,and
and still want to come here, but can't.

Because of ONE group who thinks they are so effing special.

You are being obtuse. My point is not that it's legal, nor that it's admirable. My point, as you well know but refuse to acknowledge because you are
a shill slinging empty and dishonest words, is this: people break the law for many reasons. Having chosen to break one law does not mean you'll not
respect others. See: speeding.

Awesome!

I love emotional 'arguments'. I really shed a tear,

So people should just ignore immigration law. Which means the rest of us get to ignore every LAW we don't like.

Hey let anarchy run supreme since people get to pick and choose what laws to obey.

Someone needs to tell congress to go home since they are no longer needed.

Since it's their jobs go write bills that become LAWS.

Someone needs to tell the cops to go home too since they are no longer needed. Since they don't have to be enforced.

Let ANARCHY REIGN SUPREME!

Screw financial LAWS.

Screw gun control LAWS.

Screw the ACA LAW.

Screw em all.

I am making a clear point that I am sure you understand but choose to misrepresent. Is it just that you are filled with so much hatred that you feel
that this is all a no-holds-barred match? That, because you and I are on different political "teams", it's totally acceptable for you to twist and
misrepresent my words until they suit the two dimensional straw man you are feverishly constructing? What's the point?

You are being obtuse. My point is not that it's legal, nor that it's admirable. My point, as you well know but refuse to acknowledge because you are a
shill slinging empty and dishonest words, is this: people break the law for many reasons. Having chosen to break one law does not mean you'll not
respect others. See: speeding.

The only people being 'obtuse' here are ILLEGAL immigrants when everyone else has to play by the rules.

I am making a clear point that I am sure you understand but choose to misrepresent. Is it just that you are filled with so much hatred that you feel
that this is all a no-holds-barred match? That, because you and are on different political "teams", it's totally acceptable for you to twist and
misrepresent my words until they suit the two dimensional straw man you are feverishly constructing? What's the point?

The 'strawman' was this crap.

And this is why we should round up all the people who habitually speed on the way to work and summarily execute them. We certainly can't be having law
breakers in this great society of ours.

You are being obtuse. My point is not that it's legal, nor that it's admirable. My point, as you well know but refuse to acknowledge because you are a
shill slinging empty and dishonest words, is this: people break the law for many reasons. Having chosen to break one law does not mean you'll not
respect others. See: speeding.

The only people being 'obtuse' here are ILLEGAL immigrants when everyone else has to play by the rules.

All beside the point. Your premise that a person fundamentally disrespects the rule of law if they have ever violated a law is comically absurd.
Illegal immigrants are not automatically anarchists with no regard for order. There are as many sets of motivations as there are illegal immigrants.
Some of them, I am sure, do have a callous disregard for the law of the land they move to. Most of them are likely to be desperate people taking
desperate measures to improve their lives and the lives of their dear ones. Some people speed "responsibly" in ways that add little or no risk for
others. Some people speed recklessly and take other people's lives into their hands.

The 'strawman' was this crap.

Is it hyperbole, or is it a strawman? Oh wait! I wrote it, so you could just ask me what the intent was! I wrote the below as a humorous and
sarcastic example of how absurd it is to argue that because someone immigrated illegally, they have absolutely no respect for the rule of law. Life
is not so black and white.

And this is why we should round up all the people who habitually speed on the way to work and summarily execute them. We certainly can't be having law
breakers in this great society of ours.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.